Cases1304835/2023

Claimant v True Drylining Ltd

12 January 2024Before Employment Judge EdmondsMidlands Weston papers

Outcome

Default judgment£8,181

Individual claims

Unlawful Deduction from Wagessucceeded

This was a Rule 21 default judgment where the respondent failed to present a response within the relevant time limit. The tribunal accepted the claimant's claim for unauthorised deduction from wages and awarded the full amount claimed.

Othersucceeded

The respondent failed to provide a written statement of main terms of employment as required by section 1 ERA 1996. Under section 38 Employment Act 2002, the tribunal applied a mandatory uplift of four weeks' gross pay to the award.

Facts

The claimant brought a claim for unauthorised deduction from wages totalling £6,551.72 and for the respondent's failure to provide a written statement of main terms of employment. The respondent, a drylining company, failed to present a response within the relevant time limit.

Decision

The tribunal entered default judgment under Rule 21 in favour of the claimant. The respondent was ordered to pay £6,551.72 for unauthorised deductions from wages, plus a statutory uplift of £1,628.80 (four weeks' gross pay) for failure to provide written terms, totalling £8,180.52 gross.

Practical note

Default judgments under Rule 21 are entered where a respondent fails to file a response, and tribunals will apply mandatory statutory uplifts where employers have failed to provide written statements of terms.

Award breakdown

Unpaid wages£6,552

Legal authorities cited

Statutes

Employment Rights Act 1996 s.1Employment Act 2002 s.38Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013 Rule 21

Case details

Case number
1304835/2023
Decision date
12 January 2024
Hearing type
default judgment
Hearing days
Classification
default

Respondent

Sector
construction
Represented
No

Employment details

Claimant representation

Represented
No